Guest Columns

Washington –New animal testing for lubricants required by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration can and should be replaced by non-animal methods, PETA and a lubricant company have shown. The problem is getting the FDA to accept the alternatives.

As of December 31, lubricant manufacturers have been required by the FDA to conduct testing on their products. The federal agency's required tests include injecting guinea pigs and rabbits with the lubricant to look for evidence of skin allergy and vaginal irritation – even though animals and humans have very different physiologies.

The good news is that human cells can replace animals in some of these experiments and PETA scientists have been working with lubricant companies, including Oregon-based Good Clean Love, to persuade the FDA.

PETA told Good Clean Love about a non-animal replacement for one experiment, and the company was happy to use it. Even though the FDA still insisted that it use animals, Good Clean Love conducted the non-animal test as well and shared the results with FDA. Results of the non-animal test demonstrated that this approach should be accepted by the FDA in place of using animals.

"Good Clean Love, in partnership with PETA, has proven that non-animal methods are not just good for animals; they are also good science. We will work with any company that has the tenacity and vision to make their products cruelty-free," says PETA Vice President of Regulatory Testing, Jessica Sandler.

Wendy Strgar, CEO and founder of Good Clean Love says, "I never wanted to test on animals and I'm angry that I was forced to do it. And, in the end, animal testing doesn't even tell us about toxicity."